Ferrari SF23

[Andi76]

After seeing the analysis of KYLE.ENGINEERS here, I believe that the exposed lower impact structure is not an advantage. Maybe it would have hurt more in the floor, or maybe it was too expensive to change its position.

Found an image from the lower SIS and i think Kyle is wrong this time. This definetely has an aerodynamic function. Ferrari didn't do it by chance, and in this high-pressure zone it's a natural choice and it would be negligent not to use it accordingly.

https://postimages.org/

This view shows the blister in a generous way, almost like a wing...but it's just a lighting effect to my eye.

it's not a wing. It's truly a boring blister. After all, there is no regulation preventing them from putting blisters anywhere they like. The fact that this one lies on top of the SIS means it's just to cover the SIS.

I think that is very unlikely. Because that would mean that someone would have simply changed its shape completely senselessly. It would also be highly negligent, because if I already have this element in this high-pressure zone and close to the new "S-Duct," then I try to use it accordingly. Anything else would not be very "F1-like". The theory that this is simply a "boring blister" on which someone has changed the shape without any sense in an area on which obviously a lot of attention was paid, seems completely unlikely to me. This is not to say that this thing brings advantages there. But the modified form at least brings fewer disadvantages than the original. Everything else simply makes no sense.

Another topic - during the 100 km run, Ferrari tested two different floor stays. To find out which is the better option. Also, the tests are said to have absolutely confirmed the results from the wind tunnel.

[AR3-GP]

Found an image from the lower SIS and i think Kyle is wrong this time. This definetely has an aerodynamic function. Ferrari didn't do it by chance, and in this high-pressure zone it's a natural choice and it would be negligent not to use it accordingly.

https://postimages.org/

This view shows the blister in a generous way, almost like a wing...but it's just a lighting effect to my eye.

it's not a wing. It's truly a boring blister. After all, there is no regulation preventing them from putting blisters anywhere they like. The fact that this one lies on top of the SIS means it's just to cover the SIS.

I think that is very unlikely. Because that would mean that someone would have simply changed its shape completely senselessly. It would also be highly negligent, because if I already have this element in this high-pressure zone and close to the new "S-Duct," then I try to use it accordingly. Anything else would not be very "F1-like". The theory that this is simply a "boring blister" on which someone has changed the shape without any sense in an area on which obviously a lot of attention was paid, seems completely unlikely to me. This is not to say that this thing brings advantages there. But the modified form at least brings fewer disadvantages than the original. Everything else simply makes no sense.

Sorry if that wasn’t clear. What I’m trying to say is that if Ferrari’s SIS was not located there, there would not be a blister.

Of course since it IS, they’ve shaped this blister in the most aerodynamically preferable way possible.

[Henk_v]

Maybe they carried over the tub?

I think it is fair to say it is a compromise. Its the shape that makes it unusual, but in 22 even RB ran a large blister in the floor. They have to go somewhere.

[Vanja #66]

Maybe they carried over the tub?

No, they didn't. New tub, slightly lighter, 2-3kg. That SIS in particular was further forward last year (maybe even positioned lower also), making it impossible to change the sidepods as much as they wanted.

[J_Ryder]

2-3 Kilos is quite a lot. How much does a tub weigh?

[Sevach]

In pretty much the same way a vortex generator does.

After seeing the analysis of KYLE.ENGINEERS here, I believe that the exposed lower impact structure is not an advantage. Maybe it would have hurt more in the floor, or maybe it was too expensive to change its position.

Found an image from the lower SIS and i think Kyle is wrong this time. This definetely has an aerodynamic function. Ferrari didn't do it by chance, and in this high-pressure zone it's a natural choice and it would be negligent not to use it accordingly.

https://postimages.org/

Right now i can see that it's neutral in design (still a blockage), simply an extension.
I do have one question could Ferrari do a "Mercedes" a put a downwashing fairing around it?
Would it be legal in this position? Would it be advantageous?

[Vanja #66]

Right now i can see that it's neutral in design (still a blockage), simply an extension.
I do have one question could Ferrari do a "Mercedes" a put a downwashing fairing around it?
Would it be legal in this position? Would it be advantageous?

I believe they want to leave the flow as undisturbed as possible in that area, so placing any winglets or similar geometry could be counter-productive.

[Andi76]

I found this video from the Filming Day in Fiorano. The SF23 looks great in track, seems like the new suspension are working great! And there is not the slightest sign of porpoising.

[FDD]

I found this video from the Filming Day in Fiorano. The SF23 looks great in track, seems like the new suspension are working great! And there is not the slightest sign of porpoising.

Yes looking good, but I believe that the car is far from being put to the limits.
So we have to wait for tests for initial serious observation.

[Andi76]

Great Video about Ferraris new suspension and the different philosophies of Ferrari and Mercedes because of their very different cars.



It gets explained how the roll centre changes in relation to ride heights.



It puts this also in relation to Ferraris problems last year, after TD39 made higher ride heights mandatory. With Cardille talking about about having a wider range of set-up options available with the new suspension, it is more or less obvious that the F1-75 was thrown out of its working window after the introduction of the TD39, and that they were extremely limited especially in terms of suspension and set-up. The new suspension is designed in a way that this can no longer happen. Why and how, is also explained.

It also shows how camber change in relation to ride heights



Before going into a comparison between Ferrari and Mercedes, with explaining why Mercedes lower arm is more inclined upwards, while the upper arm being almost horizontal.




bilderlink



It is explained why Mercedes has a very high roll centre with a car that has placed a lot of components very high(when compared to Ferrari) because of its sidepod concept, what results in a very higher centre of gravity. It explains why you have to move up the roll centre if you want to decrease body roll. Ferraris philosophy is totally different (obviously) as it has a very low centre of gravity to minimise body roll as much as possible, and their suspension arms are both almost horizontal.

It explains, in a simplified two dimensional version, very well the differences and effects of the two different suspension kinematics and Ferraris new one in particular.

Susequently the "S-Duct" is also discussed and the adaption of Mercedes of the "bathtube", what i still think is quite interesting. In the Italian media it is always said that the W13 lacked downforce, while the British media constantly reported that the W13 produces superior downforce. Which is what Mercedes itself was constantly saying. Sure - supposedly Mercedes had to sacrifice downforce because they couldn't drive the W13 with the low ground clearances that were supposedly necessary. This should have been fixed with the W14. The thought that comes to mind is - now that they have adapted a concept with the "Ferrari bathtub" that produces downforce in this area while reducing drag, the W14 should be so superior in downforce (assuming they have eliminated all the "bugs" of the W13 and what Mercedes and the 2022 British media said about the downforce of the concept is true) that it should dominate the 2023 season. Even if by the "enlargement" of the side boxes in this regard some downforce was given. One can only hope that this is not the case and I personally do not believe in the story of the so superior downforce values of this concept. The 2023 season will now show the reality and I think this will be one of the exciting things we will find out.

[Vanja #66]

Great Video about Ferraris new suspension and the different philosophies of Ferrari and Mercedes because of their very different cars.


****

Good stuff, makes sense. Did they analyse the SF-23 and W14 suspension geometry layouts or did they just offer these geometries as the most likely layouts?

[Vanja #66]

From the filming day:

Missed this jewel somehow. Compared to 2022 final spec bellow, engine cover's much tighter. Definitely, both the sidepods and engine cover are tighter, excellent for external aero. This engine cover geometry would make the rear wing "work" as close as possible to completely unobstructed upstream. Both in straight line and, more importantly, while cornering. Also, the ambient pressure region in the tubs might be unified with engine cover pressure region, thus also reducing drag slightly.

Looks like every visible aspect of the car was clearly improved from F1-75, no doubt the floor as well. Nothing looks to have been compromised in return. No wonder they are proud of what they achieved in Ferrari. Let's see how it stacks up against the competition.

[johnny comelately]

Is it worth/legal/possible putting the louvre vents air down through the underfloor?
signed,
failed aero 101 for dummies.

[F1ern]

From the filming day:
https://i.imgur.com/1dcT6oc.png

Missed this jewel somehow. Compared to 2022 final spec bellow, engine cover's much tighter. Definitely, both the sidepods and engine cover are tighter, excellent for external aero. This engine cover geometry would make the rear wing "work" as close as possible to completely unobstructed upstream. Both in straight line and, more importantly, while cornering. Also, the ambient pressure region in the tubs might be unified with engine cover pressure region, thus also reducing drag slightly.

Looks like every visible aspect of the car was clearly improved from F1-75, no doubt the floor as well. Nothing looks to have been compromised in return. No wonder they are proud of what they achieved in Ferrari. Let's see how it stacks up against the competition.

https://f1grandprix.motorionline.com/do ... he-155.jpg

They did a fantastic job. Sidepods, motorcover are much tighter compared to last year, venting louvres are less in number and smaller, back hot air exit around the exhaust was small before but now is non-existent. Really impressive.

[Vanja #66]

Is it worth/legal/possible putting the louvre vents air down through the underfloor?
signed,
failed aero 101 for dummies.

I would say very much worth it, but isn't allowed for who knows how long. Not nearly an expert in rules through history, like jjn9128, but it could have been ruled out even before Brabham BT46 fancar.